On Jan 4, 8:13 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je...@phiwumbda.org> wrote:> Zuhair <zaljo...@gmail.com> writes:> > Dear fom I'm not against Uncountability, I'm not against Cantor's> > argument. I'm saying that Cantor's argument is CORRECT. All what I'm> > saying is that it is COUNTER-INTUITIVE as it violates the> > Distinguishability argument which is an argument that comes from> > intuition excerised in the FINITE world. That's all.>> But you've neither explained the meaning of your second premise nor> given any indication why it is plausible.>I did but you just missed it.

My second premise is that finite distinguishability is countable.

What I meant by that is that we can only have countably manydistinguishable finite initial segments of reals. And this has alreadybeen proved. There is no plausibility here, this is a matter that isagreed upon.

Zuhair> --> Jesse F. Hughes>> "How lucky we are to be able to hear how miserable Willie Nelson could> imagine himself to be." -- Ken Tucker on Fresh Air